PTG1
Active Member
Anybody know the current regs. re lifejackets, inc gas cartridges on aircraft to Med?
Lifejackets on aircraft
- Thread starter PTG1
- Start date
Moodyjim
Well-Known Member
Why, want to take one with you?
oceanfroggie
Well-Known Member
AAMOI Life jackets on wide body civilian jets are a waste of space, but more importantly a waste of weight. One could argu the added weight is a safety disadvantage. They are never going to be used, they are merely psychological props to reassure nervous pax.
It was a different matter on the small civilian aircraft of the 40s and 50s (eg DC3, Friendships) that have a chance to staying intact after a ditching, as do small modern commuter aircraft like turbo props, etc, but a widebody has as much chance of ditching as elvis has appearing at the albert hall this christmas. They will simply totally disintegrate as soon as they hit the water. Sadly in the case of the hyjack of an Ethiopian Airlines 767 some years ago, when it ran out of fuel, and crashed ditched near a beech, many of the surviving pax drowned because their inflated life jackets made it impossible to escape the wreakage. Undoubtedly some of the survivers were saved by their pfds. The statistical chances of a wide body a) needing to ditch and b) staying intact are so remote is it worth carrying pfds anymore. Still the safest way to travel.
It was a different matter on the small civilian aircraft of the 40s and 50s (eg DC3, Friendships) that have a chance to staying intact after a ditching, as do small modern commuter aircraft like turbo props, etc, but a widebody has as much chance of ditching as elvis has appearing at the albert hall this christmas. They will simply totally disintegrate as soon as they hit the water. Sadly in the case of the hyjack of an Ethiopian Airlines 767 some years ago, when it ran out of fuel, and crashed ditched near a beech, many of the surviving pax drowned because their inflated life jackets made it impossible to escape the wreakage. Undoubtedly some of the survivers were saved by their pfds. The statistical chances of a wide body a) needing to ditch and b) staying intact are so remote is it worth carrying pfds anymore. Still the safest way to travel.
Oen
Well-Known Member
Sorry, Froggie, I need to take issue with you on a number of points:
A ditching is most likely near an airport, possibly at low speed, and probably into shallow water (Recently, and just off the top of my head, Edinburgh, Liverpool (two), Hong Kong, Genoa, and Sligo (nearly - it wasn't quite a ditching as the tide was out).
Many airports are, for historical or environmental reasons, located near the coast. Some, like Nice and the new HK airport, are built out into the sea (this brings the added problem of maximising the birdstrike hazard). Every time I taxied out at Nice I looked at the very small overrun area available, and the rocks and sea immediately beyond.
Any floatation aids will greatly assist. The weight penalty is unlikely to have any effect, as twin jets don't seem to have one-engine-inoperative 'performance' accidents, and have enormous excess thrust, making them less liable to all-engines-operating 'performance' accidents.
Widebody aircraft have been 'successfully' ditched.
...and it may not, depending on how you crunch the numbers, be 'the safest way to travel'. On a fatality basis, trains are 'better'. On an injury basis, trains are 'worse'. And don't forget that flying in small aircraft is often much less 'safe' than travelling by car.
Now, to answer the original question, a quick search here will provide lots of threads on this in the past, but the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations apply, and they did permit the carriage of one lifejacket with its own canister and one spare canister per passenger. What they say, or whether they are being altered, since the latest liquid bomb threat, I'm not sure. Check with the airline.
A ditching is most likely near an airport, possibly at low speed, and probably into shallow water (Recently, and just off the top of my head, Edinburgh, Liverpool (two), Hong Kong, Genoa, and Sligo (nearly - it wasn't quite a ditching as the tide was out).
Many airports are, for historical or environmental reasons, located near the coast. Some, like Nice and the new HK airport, are built out into the sea (this brings the added problem of maximising the birdstrike hazard). Every time I taxied out at Nice I looked at the very small overrun area available, and the rocks and sea immediately beyond.
Any floatation aids will greatly assist. The weight penalty is unlikely to have any effect, as twin jets don't seem to have one-engine-inoperative 'performance' accidents, and have enormous excess thrust, making them less liable to all-engines-operating 'performance' accidents.
Widebody aircraft have been 'successfully' ditched.
...and it may not, depending on how you crunch the numbers, be 'the safest way to travel'. On a fatality basis, trains are 'better'. On an injury basis, trains are 'worse'. And don't forget that flying in small aircraft is often much less 'safe' than travelling by car.
Now, to answer the original question, a quick search here will provide lots of threads on this in the past, but the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations apply, and they did permit the carriage of one lifejacket with its own canister and one spare canister per passenger. What they say, or whether they are being altered, since the latest liquid bomb threat, I'm not sure. Check with the airline.
woody001
Well-Known Member
I always just wack it in the suitcase and keep quiet, if they take it they take it dont they.
My thinking is, how many can's of hairspray, lynx, lighters etc do you think are in the suitcases!??
My thinking is, how many can's of hairspray, lynx, lighters etc do you think are in the suitcases!??
oceanfroggie
Well-Known Member
Hi Oen
Sure I accept your point about run offs from runways near water. I've been an avid reader of accident reports, but dont recall a widebody sinking as a result of a run off[ QUOTE ]
Widebody aircraft have been 'successfully' ditched.
[/ QUOTE ]Only in the movies. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif They've successfully 'dead sticked' from cruise alt on three occasions with zero fatalities, but I've never heard of a modern wide body successfully ditching on water (ie stay intact, where the fuselage did not break up or wings rip off), always leading to fatalites. Engine pods need to hit the water on both sides at exactly the same instant to avoid cartwheel effect as they are ripped from the wings. A widebody's skin is akin to tin foil when it hits water at 150kt, especially if there are 3m waves, it would be like hitting walls.
Agree with you totally about GA and especially private flying accident statistics - they are off the scale. Safer to strap yourself to the front bumper of Schuies ferrari and race around inside bull ring.
Back on topic, interesting on the luggage issue for marine PFDs. I would have thought a PFD gas cylinder should not be permitted as hand luggage due to its ability to exert concentrated force when coupled with something less biegn that a PFD. Still if they are under every seat whats the fuss! /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif Ready stock pile of energy for the wrong hands!
Sure I accept your point about run offs from runways near water. I've been an avid reader of accident reports, but dont recall a widebody sinking as a result of a run off[ QUOTE ]
Widebody aircraft have been 'successfully' ditched.
[/ QUOTE ]Only in the movies. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif They've successfully 'dead sticked' from cruise alt on three occasions with zero fatalities, but I've never heard of a modern wide body successfully ditching on water (ie stay intact, where the fuselage did not break up or wings rip off), always leading to fatalites. Engine pods need to hit the water on both sides at exactly the same instant to avoid cartwheel effect as they are ripped from the wings. A widebody's skin is akin to tin foil when it hits water at 150kt, especially if there are 3m waves, it would be like hitting walls.
Agree with you totally about GA and especially private flying accident statistics - they are off the scale. Safer to strap yourself to the front bumper of Schuies ferrari and race around inside bull ring.
Back on topic, interesting on the luggage issue for marine PFDs. I would have thought a PFD gas cylinder should not be permitted as hand luggage due to its ability to exert concentrated force when coupled with something less biegn that a PFD. Still if they are under every seat whats the fuss! /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif Ready stock pile of energy for the wrong hands!
Oen
Well-Known Member
When I said 'successfully', I meant that there were survivors. Ditching a heavy aircraft does not mean instant death for all occupants. You're probably right about 'sinking', but this is often - as the photo shows - because the water is not deep enough...
When researching this issue a while ago, I was astonished to learn that 88% of all ditchings (all aircraft types, worldwide) are survived. Very often, fatalities then ensue as a result of drowning and hypothermia.
On the subject of cylinders, how can their contents be determined???
oceanfroggie
Well-Known Member
Hi Oen
Yes I remember years ago in training being told the statistics for light aircraft ditching at sea. Average life expectancy in the irish sea in winter was about 25 mins (ie inflated pfd in the water). The worst stats were for high wing, fixed under carriage aircraft like old cessna's which few crew ever escaped from due to the nose tucking in on impact. Aircraft structure usually survived, but crews rarely got out. Gear up low wing on a calm sea had quite a different outcome. Some of my colleagues wore dry suits when flying single engine over water at night! Multiengine, deiced on airways, only way to go!
Yes I remember years ago in training being told the statistics for light aircraft ditching at sea. Average life expectancy in the irish sea in winter was about 25 mins (ie inflated pfd in the water). The worst stats were for high wing, fixed under carriage aircraft like old cessna's which few crew ever escaped from due to the nose tucking in on impact. Aircraft structure usually survived, but crews rarely got out. Gear up low wing on a calm sea had quite a different outcome. Some of my colleagues wore dry suits when flying single engine over water at night! Multiengine, deiced on airways, only way to go!